Save the women and the children first

[Washington Resistance Army]

I'm down to save the children first but sorry ladies, welcome to equality.

[Agarntrop]

Save women and girls first.

You would save adult women before male children? Strange logic.

[Nattily Dressed Anarchists on Bicycles]

Hidden option three: Bring enough lifeboats.

Point of order: Titanic was already carrying more lifeboats than was required. Its just that the amount carried was based around the idea of needing to ferry passengers to a ship already on scene rather than "get everyone off and wait for rescue".

AsI implied, not enough.

[The New California Republic]

Yes.

Man I don't even know why I bothered to ask.

You had a 62% chance of surviving if you were first class, a 41% chance if you were second class, and it plummets down to 25% for third class.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Kids should be saved first. Women can be saved at the same time as the men.

[Esalia]

This is exactly what we refer to as Birkenhead's Drill. HMS Birkenhead was one of the first iron-hulled ships built for the Royal Navy. However, the vessel was wrecked on 26 February 1852, while transporting troops to Algoa Bay at Danger Point near Gansbaai, 87 miles (140 kilometres) from Cape Town in the Cape Colony. There were not enough serviceable lifeboats for all the passengers, and the soldiers famously stood firm on board, thereby allowing the women and children to board the boats safely and escape the sinking. Only 193 of the estimated 643 people on board survived, and the soldiers' chivalry gave rise to the unofficial "women and children first" protocol when abandoning ship, while the "Birkenhead drill" of Rudyard Kipling's poem came to describe courage in face of hopeless circumstances.

I think all human life has value, however I wouldn't call this sexist or ageist. Obviously the moral duty of these soldiers may make it more understandable in their particular position, and my point is not to discount the somewhat unfair and arguably sexist concept of male expendability. However, I do believe that generally speaking as parents should hold the responsibility of putting their children lives before their own and soldiers should before those of civilian status, we should as a society generally in situations such as these first ensure the safety of children, then following those of women who do not hold specific positions of responsibility such as in the case of being for example a soldier/servicemember. And then if such is sufficient consider other priority individuals. I do believe in a level of a specific kind of masculinity that is derived from self sacrifice in order to save others. Such a concept may be arguably outdated and sexist. However, I do not believe so. I think chivalry still has a specific role to play in situations like this that require said kind of courage to ensure anyone let alone a specific category of people survive the situation.

Arguing that certain individuals have certain (chosen) responsibilities that put them further back in the line of priority for who can be rescued is fine.

But I'm a pretty big fan of things like equality, and I'm also not a fan of treating people worse than others because of a trait not under their control. Men didn't get to choose to be men, and placing them below women solely because they're men is pretty disgusting to me.

Masculinity shouldn't come with the expectation that I am not supposed to be saved in an emergency when there's an opportunity solely because I'm a man and there's still women who need to be rescued. Men shouldn't be treated as lesser to women solely because they were unfortunate enough to not be born women.

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

Save women and girls first.

You would save adult women before male children? Strange logic.

Yes because the former are female and biologically female organisms are more important than male ones as long as they are fertile. All sexually reproducing animals with genders understand that. I’m just not sure why humans don’t.

[Iwassoclose]

You would save adult women before male children? Strange logic.

Yes because the former are female and biologically female organisms are more important than male ones as long as they are fertile. All sexually reproducing animals with genders understand that. I’m just not sure why humans don’t.

See that kind of logic would work if there was a very small pool of female "organisms" left. But they make up half the population and are no where near extinction levels.

Using that logic I am not sure why you think saving one over the other would matter.

[Esalia]

You would save adult women before male children? Strange logic.

Yes because the former are female and biologically female organisms are more important than male ones as long as they are fertile. All sexually reproducing animals with genders understand that. I’m just not sure why humans don’t.

Considering that the human population is near 8 billion and in most catastrophes like this it's a few hundred to a few thousand, I don't think it's all that essential that we save the women first.

Unless we're talking something like "the entire population of Monaco is on a cruise ship", saving both men and women isn't going to destroy a country, or have too major of an affect to the point where women being capable of having kids is particularly relevant.

[The Emerald Legion]

My family, friends, and I first, my countrymen second, allied nationals third, and rival nationals fourth.

I put no inherent value on women and children for being women and children.

[Gothgraff and Lilium]

Only people I'll put ahead of me is my Partner then a solid 1/2 of my family. Everyone else, Its been great knowing you.

[Agarntrop]

You would save adult women before male children? Strange logic.

Yes because the former are female and biologically female organisms are more important than male ones as long as they are fertile. All sexually reproducing animals with genders understand that. I’m just not sure why humans don’t.

Children are saved first because of their vunerability and the fact they still have decades left to live.

Valuing people's lives on their reproductive ability is the logic of a sociopath.

[The Emerald Legion]

Yes because the former are female and biologically female organisms are more important than male ones as long as they are fertile. All sexually reproducing animals with genders understand that. I’m just not sure why humans don’t.

Children are saved first because of their vunerability and the fact they still have decades left to live.

Valuing people's lives on their reproductive ability is the logic of a sociopath.

Vulnerability perhaps. The fact that they have decades left to live isn't really relevant, because the elderly are also typically lumped in with the children during evacuations.

Able Bodied adults are able to help with the ongoing crisis to try and keep it from deteriorating faster and give more people time to get away, while children and the elderly would just get in the way.

[Zul-ar]

The weakest, regardless of gender, should be saved first, since they have a lower chance of surviving.

I can swim, and have some tenacity. An old man will likely die if he isn't on a boat. I might be able to manage a day or two if I'm stranded, but a toddler is dead meat. Thus, it makes sense that I don't get priority in any disaster situation, and that a weaker person should.

[Zul-ar]

You would save adult women before male children? Strange logic.

Yes because the former are female and biologically female organisms are more important than male ones as long as they are fertile. All sexually reproducing animals with genders understand that. I’m just not sure why humans don’t.

This isn't a world-ending situation, we're talking about a ship crash, or a natural disaster or something. Humanity is currently in no shortage of people. There's no good reason to preserve fertility instead of prioritizing life.

[Neutraligon]

Save Children, pregnant women, those with injuries etc first then begin evacuating abled bodied people both men and women. I hate this notion men should stay behind and die, men should not be seen as expendable.

Or you know make sure ships are outfitted with enough rowboats and emergency craft for the total number of crew and passengers it can carry so you dont have to discriminate based on sex or anything else.

Add the elderly to that list, though yes including enough lifeboats is far better.

[Adamede]

Just put in more life boats.

But the way I see it is;
Children, teens, pregnant women and infants first, followed by the elderly and those who are handicapped in some way, then both healthy men and women.

Yes, I would save the women and children first. My life isn't worth more than a woman or child's.

I would rather die than a woman or a child die.

What about another man?

[Senkaku]

It may seem chauvinist but as an evolutionary instinct, it does make sense

that said, our species' whole shtick is that we're special bc we can transcend base evolutionary instinct, so

[New haven america]

Hidden option three: Bring enough lifeboats.

The Titanic is actually the reason for most modern safety measures on nautical vessels.

You need to have a surplus of readily available lifeboats and jackets and can't discriminate based on class, age, or sex/gender. If the ship has a regular capacity of 1000 passengers then you better have enough lifeboats and jackets to save 1,100 at least, likewise, you can't check a passengers ticket or room number, you get them on those boats regardless.

[New haven america]

There are 7.5 billion people on this planet, we don't need to save people based on sex/gender and age anymore.

[Adamede]

Yes because the former are female and biologically female organisms are more important than male ones as long as they are fertile. All sexually reproducing animals with genders understand that. I’m just not sure why humans don’t.

Children are saved first because of their vunerability and the fact they still have decades left to live.

Valuing people's lives on their reproductive ability is the logic of a sociopath.

This is the same dude that wants to literally destroy China and all Chinese identity.

[Adamede]

It may seem chauvinist but as an evolutionary instinct, it does make sense

that said, our species' whole shtick is that we're special bc we can transcend base evolutionary instinct, so

Have we really though?

[Senkaku]

It may seem chauvinist but as an evolutionary instinct, it does make sense

that said, our species' whole shtick is that we're special bc we can transcend base evolutionary instinct, so

Have we really though?

I would say, based on the miraculous self-propelled steel wagons lined up outside of the gigantic concrete and steel structure I live inside, illuminated by flameless light, that yes, a little bit

[Adamede]

Have we really though?

I would say, based on the miraculous self-propelled steel wagons lined up outside of the gigantic concrete and steel structure I live inside, illuminated by flameless light, that yes, a little bit

I’d say there’s a difference between instinct and intellect. We’re not exactly the most rational of creatures.

[Sanghyeok]

I believe the rules should be similar to priority seats on the metro: aim to help the injured/disabled, young, pregnant women and elderly first.